This article applies a modified conceptual framework derived from Sabatier’s advocacy coalition framework and Haas’ epistemic communities’ framework to analyze climate advocacy coalitions in Guangzhou, China, a largely unexplored area of study. Our analysis reveals several key features of the climate policy advocacy groups working to promote policy change within the policy subsystem of a nonpluralistic regime: (a) mutual interdependence (consensus building) in the creation of an advocacy coalition system, (b) government recognition and endorsement of newly established or professionally oriented coalition organizations, (c) coalition formation in a top-down manner rather than by accumulative bottom-up demands, and (d) bottom-up motivators, such as changing societal values and the external environment, which contribute to and accelerate the reform of policy orientation and the administrative structure of coalition formation.
CarterN. (2007). The politics of the environment: Ideas, activism, policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Census and Statistics Department. (2010). Hong Kong energy statistics annual report. Hong Kong: Author.
3.
ChuS. Y.SchroederH. (2010). Private governance of climate change in Hong Kong: An analysis of drivers and barriers to corporate action. Asian Studies Review, 34, 287-308.
4.
ColemanW. D.SkogstadG. D.AtkinsonM. M. (1997). Paradigm shifts and policy networks: Cumulative change in agriculture. Journal of Public Policy, 16, 273-301.
5.
Francesch-HuidobroM. (2011). Governance of climate change in coastal cities: The example of Hong Kong. In AertsJ.BowmanM.WardP.DirckeP. (Eds.), Climate adaptation and flood risk in coastal cities (pp. 243-263). London, England: Earthscan from Routledge.
6.
Francesch-HuidobroM. (2012). Institutional deficit and lack of legitimacy: The challenges of climate change governance in Hong Kong. Environmental Politics. Advance online publication.
GusfieldJ. R. (1989). Constructing the ownership of social problems: Fun and profit in the welfare state. Social Problems, 36, 416-430.
9.
HaasP. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1-35.
10.
HaasP. M. (2001). Epistemic communities and policy knowledge. In International encyclopedia of social and behavioural sciences (pp. 1157-1186). New York, NY: Elsevier.
11.
HoP. (2007). Embedded activism and political change in a semi-authoritarian context. China Information, 21, 187-208.
12.
HowlettM. (2002). Do networks matter? Linking policy network structure to policy outcomes: Evidence from four Canadian policy sectors 1990-2000. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 35, 235-267.
JänickeM. (2006). The environmental state and environmental flows: The need to reinvent the nation-state. In SpaargarenG. (Ed.), Governing environmental flows: Global challenges to social theory (pp. 83-105). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15.
Jenkins-SmithH. C.SabatierP. A. (1993). The dynamics of policy oriented learning. In SabatierP. A.Jenkins-SmithH. C. (Eds.), Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach (pp. 41-58). Boulder, CO: Westview.
16.
JonesC.HesterlyW. S.BorgattiS. (1997). A general theory of network governance: Exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 22, 911-945.
17.
JonesG.GeorgeJ. (1998). The experience and evolution of trust: Implications for cooperation and teamwork. Academy of Management Review, 23, 531-546.
18.
LiY. W.BoM.LangG. (2011). The local environmental state in China: a study of county-level cities in Suzhou. The China Quarterly, 205, 115–132.
19.
MolA. P. J.ButtelF. H. (Eds.). (2002). The environmental state under pressure. Amsterdam, Netherlands: JAI.
20.
MolA. P. J.CarterN. T. (2007). China’s environmental governance in transition. In CarterN.MolA. P. J. (Eds.), Environmental governance in China (pp. 1-22). London, England: Routledge.
21.
NDRC. (2005). Initial communications on climate change. Beijing, China: Author.
22.
NDRC. (2007). China’s national climate change program. Beijing, China: Author.
23.
NDRC. (2009). China’s policies and actions on climate change: Annual progress report 2009. Beijing, China: Author.
24.
QiY.MaL.ZhangH.LiH. (2008). Translating a global issue into local priority: China’s local government response to climate change. Journal of Environmental Development, 17, 379-400.
25.
SabatierP. A. (1998). The advocacy coalition framework: Revision and relevance for Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 5(1), 98-130.
26.
SabatierP. A.Jenkins-SmithH. C. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment. In SabatierP. A. (Ed.), Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview.
SilkeA.KriesiH. (2007). The network approach. In SabatierP. A. (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 129-154). Boulder, CO: Westview.
29.
TeetsJ. C. (2009). Post-earthquake relief and reconstruction efforts: The emergence of civil society in China?China Quarterly, 198, 330-347.
30.
WuF. (2004). New partners or old brothers? GONGOs in transnational environmental advocacy in China. China Environmental Series, 5, 45-58.
31.
ZhanX.TangS. Y. (in press). Political opportunities, resource constraints and policy advocacy of environmental NGOs in China. Public Administration. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.x
